2. Contact Info

3. Dealer Selection

Thirty-five years ago, the word “Watergate” was being re-Webstered from meaning “a snazzy apartment building in Washington, D.C.” to “a coverup investigation involving the White House, two reporters who don’t look anything like Robert Redford and Dustin Hoffman, and a guy named ‘Deep Throat.'” The most popular show on TV was about a grump named Archie whose tattered easy chair would go on to occupy a place in the Smithsonian. Half of the current staff of Motor Trend hadn’t even been born yet (yes, Angus, we’re getting old). That year, 1974, would also mark the final moment for decades in which America’s streets would be prowled by all three current-gen versions of the most iconic-ever ponycars: the Chevy Camaro, the Dodge Challenger, and the Ford Mustang.

Frankly, we thought we’d never see the tire smoke from the ponycar wars again.

Defying the oddsmakers, though, America’s three trick ponies are back. And they’re back big. Those days of yore are indeed long-gone — but only because the new incarnations of the Camaro, Challenger, and Mustang are so far evolved from their famed predecessors they’re recognizable almost by name only. Sure, the old cars looked cool and made lots of noise and got the girls, and some could even lay down a righteous longitudinal blast when the road arrowed straight. But none could match these current machines for blistering speed, cornering ability, braking power, driveability, reliability, and comfort. I mean, when I was 16, we didn’t have fancy computers to make our cars run like winged chariots, and we didn’t have in-car iPod adaptors (unless you count the Tijuana Brass on eight-track), and we sure didn’t have…never mind. You whippersnappers today don’t know how good you’ve got it.

What remains utterly unchanged, however, is a degree of nameplate loyalty and fan mania the likes of which might be matched by the current March Madness B-ball tourney. Or maybe not. After all, Camaro versus Mustang versus Challenger is deeply ingrained into the American psyche, the four-wheeled equivalent of the Hatfields versus the McCoys versus…uh, the HatCoys. Doesn’t really matter which car we deem the best or what the numbers say — the feuding factions will stand behind their favorites like a third-grader defending his mom against the schoolyard rabble. Might even be a few bloody noses thrown in if the hostilities escalate to the level of, “Yeah? Well, your Challenger’s so fat…”

Hey, but we love a good debate (or at least starting one). So…we proudly present our exclusive, first-ever, side-by-side-by-side comparison of the new Chevrolet Camaro SS, the Dodge Challenger R/T, and the Ford Mustang GT. All the numbers, all our driving impressions…just one winner.

Let the flame-throwing begin…

Three of a Kind

All three ponies share similar basic blueprints. The foundation: aggressive two-door bodywork, at least a semblance of a back seat and a trunk, brawny V-8 mounted up front and driving the rear wheels through an available manual shifter, suspension biased toward responsiveness over cushiness, price tag hovering somewhere in the affordasphere. All three have also obviously been injected, Jurassic Park-like, with DNA from their long-deceased ancestors.

Of the three, the Ford Mustang, of course, has been with us all along. True, soon after its 1960s heyday Dearborn’s ponycar morphed into the heinous “Mustang II” — an anemic lump of Iacocca-fueled cynicism that looked good only when Farah Fawcett-Majors was driving it and your eyes were closed — but eventually Ford came to its senses and the Mustang was born again proud. The current, 2010 version boasts newly freshened sheetmetal, a vastly upgraded cockpit, and a SOHC, 4.6L V-8 making 315 hp and throaty exhaust sounds worthy of “Bullitt.”

Last year, Dodge bravely resurrected the long-gone Challenger (missing since ’74) with an all-new car that masterfully recalls the bandit-eyed original made famous by Kowalski’s high-speed, existentialist dash in the 1971 movie “Vanishing Point.” Though first available only in mega-output SRT8 form, for 2009 the Challenger gains a new R/T edition, powered by a 376-hp, 5.7L Hemi V-8 and available with a six-speed manual — including retro-licious pistol-grip shifter (A V-6-powered SE coupe also joins the 2009 stable).

The newest entry, missing since 2002 and once feared RIP forever, is Chevy‘s Camaro. The structure, including an independent rear suspension, owes its roots to GM’s Zeta global platform (i.e., the Australian Commodore); the ravishing bodywork flows from the keen hand of South Korea-born chief designer Sang Yup Lee. Though available in base form with a superb, 3.6L direct-injection six making 304 hp, the Camaro in topline SS trim brandishes a 6.2L V-8 (GM’s LS3 from the 2008 Vette) making a strapping 426 hp and mated to a six-speed manual shifter. (Opt for the six-speed auto, and the SS engine changes to the L99 6.2L V-8, rated at 400 hp and outfitted with Active Fuel Management capable of deactivating four cylinders when not needed.) Tires are 20-in. Pirelli PZero summer meats standard (if you’re foolish enough to trade handling moves for curb presence, Chevy dealers also offer a 21-in. wheel/tire combo). Also standard: four huge four-piston Brembo brakes. Put simply, GM has left nothing on the table with the release of its reincarnated pony.

Mountain-Do

We gathered all three players together in the lightly traveled, serpentine hill country east of San Diego. Armed with a full battery of track numbers, courtesy of an instrumented test conducted just three hours earlier in Detroit and beamed to us via BlackBerry and iPhone by technical director Frank Markus, our comparo team — editor-in-chief Angus MacKenzie, senior editor Ed Loh, and yours truly — strapped in, kicked the spurs into our pony trio, and galloped into the twisties. Immediately, the subjective impressions — good and bad — began flowing into our neural data loggers. Some comments from the logbooks:

Ford Mustang GT with Track Pack

Angus MacKenzie:The best steering in an American car. Ever. Direct, linear, good feel. Astounding turn-in response — helped in no small way by the PZero tires. Superb pedal placement — brake and clutch and gas pedals nicely aligned; heel-and-toe downshifts a cinch. Five-speed manual lighter, crisper shift than Tremec 6060 in the other two. Downside is there’s a giant hole between fourth and and fifth. V-8 is smooth, revs nicely, pulls hard. Performance helped by weight advantage over other two; helps this 315-hp car punch above its weight.

Mustang feels very connected to the road — telegraphs what’s going on where the rubber meets the road — at both ends. Handles better than any car with a live rear axle has a right to, though if the road surface is gnarly, you’ll be chasing the rear end all the time, and therefore will be ultimately slower point to point than the Camaro. This is more like a sports car than a ponycar, and on a smooth road or track, you feel you can do almost anything in it.

Ed Loh:The biggest surprise here. I thought the Camaro would leave the Mustang in a ditch by the side of the road, but I was genuinely surprised at how capable the Mustang is. Its long and meaty third gear sends the car roaring up Sunrise Highway. Similar to the Camaro, though the downhill is where the Mustang begins to separate itself. Sharper more communicative steering (a result of that Track Pack?) gives the Mustang more confidence through corners. I felt more front-end grip and less lateral sway from the suspension — especially under braking when approaching a corner.

Sure, the live axle might send the Ford shivering if the pavement were rougher, but I think it’s important to note that we had no problems with this supposedly antiquated suspension setup. And, sure, I’d love to see how a non-Track-Pack-equipped version would handle up and down those roads. But as a guy who has long slagged the live axle, color me impressed.

Indeed, the Mustang GT left all of us astounded at what magic Ford’s engineers have achieved with this seemingly antiquated architecture. “That GT turns in like a race car,” was our communal opinion after our mountain romps. Only when the road surface deteriorates does the Mustang GT begin to lose its poise. But, man, the incredible bite of the front end is the stuff test drivers write poetry about. Astonishing.

Dodge Challenger R/T

Angus MacKenzie:Big steering wheel, like helming a yacht, with Benz DNA buried deep, as you can feel the slight pause as you swing through on-center. R/T suspension tune way softer, less controlled than SRT8’s. More body movement, squirms around on the springs and bushings. Have to be deliberate with the car through the twisties — brake, then turn, then get on the gas. Once it takes a set, though, it’s quite predictable. Just gets flustered if you want to change direction in a hurry. Goodyear Eagle RS-A tires in nowhere near the same league as the Pirellis. You feel the shoulders juddering at the limit.

Default handling mode is understeer, amplified by lower-geared steering and big wheel. Brake feel the worst of the three. Terrific cruise car, though; just lopes along the freeways. Comfortable seats, ride. The 5.7 Hemi likes to rev. It’s a nice engine and has well-defined V-8 sound in the cabin. Pedal placement is poor — brake pedal high and widely spaced relative to gas pedal; makes heel-and-toe downshifts more clumsy.

Ed Loh:“This thing feels bigger by half” is the first thing I said after getting into the Challenger from the Mustang. Indeed, it’s even about 25 percent larger than the Camaro, both in interior space (the Dodge’s rear seat is the only one I’d want to be in on a trip longer than around the block) and the way it feels on the road. Drive the Challenger 20 yards on Sunrise Highway, and it becomes clear it doesn’t stand a chance with the other two on the twisties. Even the much more expensive SRT8 would have trouble hanging with this crowd. With the R/T the power is fine, it’s just the extra weight that translates to slow and deliberate handling. Asking it to carve up and down mountain roads is like asking a lineman to run double-out routes. It will do it, but it won’t be pretty.

On my drives up and down Sunrise, the Challenger was the only car that substantially engaged stability control. Arrived at our turnaround spot with the brakes simply stinking. Simply too much mass to hustle around. For everything else — highway blasts, cruising about town, roasting tires in parking lots — the big orange Dodge is every bit the Mustang and Camaro’s equal. I think it does so with more style, too; and no questions about the build quality (unlike with the Ford). I love that the modern Dodge Challenger‘s cultural touchstone is “Vanishing Point” — an obscure movie from the era of the old car. I’m less enthusiastic that with the new Camaro everyone references a marketing campaign disguised as a summer blockbuster…

In a nutshell, the Challenger R/T is just too big and soft to hang with Mustang and Camaro when the road gets kinky; it’s a Clydesdale compared with the two Thoroughbreds. The scales bear this out: The Challenger R/T presses down on the earth with 4154 lb, 295 more than the Camaro SS and a massive 582 more than the Mustang GT. Uncle Isaac Newton decrees there’s simply no way this pony can gavotte like its rivals. On the other hand, Uncle Isaac just doesn’t grasp the more subtle appeal of man-size cabin quarters and a classic bandit grille…

Chevrolet Camaro SS

Angus MacKenzie:V-8 power delivery feels quite linear. Engine still very green, though — just 867 miles; our Matt Stone reckons Chevy small blocks typically need 5000 miles before they’re in the sweet spot. Steering feels slower, more deliberate than Mustang’s, however it’s linear and predictable. Clutch take-up on manual too sharp; have to be careful not to stall. Default handling is mild understeer at the limit. Car is impressively planted, regardless of the road surface. Rear-end traction is superb; car tracks brilliantly, even over mid-corner lumps. As a result, you will carry more corner speed in the Camaro than in the other two, regardless of road surface.

Ed Loh:Touchy clutch on the Camaro means it’s the only one I stalled. Engine note and response not as thrilling as the Mustang’s — surprising given the 111-hp advantage — but the Camaro is much quieter inside. Steering is a touch vague on-center in comparison with Mustang. Just off-center it picks up nicely, though still not as sharp as the Ford’s. Again, I wonder how much of that is the Mustang’s Track Pack. Far less body motion on the road than in the Challenger, but the front end seems to sashay side to side more than the Ford’s when I make mid-corner corrections. Otherwise, once set in a corner, the Camaro feels exceptionally planted. Power out of turn and you’re rewarded with nothing but forward thrust. Would love to see how this thing moves around a track like the Streets of Willow Springs.

If the notes seem nitpicky toward the Camaro, that’s because, as the newest entry — and the only one we hadn’t driven before — it received the closest scrutiny by our evaluation team. During our post-drive discussions, our consensus was that the Mustang rules for steering feel and responsiveness, but the Camaro feels more mature and refined. You’d be giddy pushing either of these two through a mountain pass, and if the road were smooth the Mustang GT might have an edge. But for all-around prowess and stability, the Camaro SS has the advantage. Frankly, though, we’re amazed at how close the real-world-handling comparison turned out. Sorry, Hatfields and McCoys: No huge winner here. Both Mustang GT and Camaro SS tackle mountain roads superbly.

Your Numbers Are Up

Tell war stories about the prowess of their long-departed ancestors to any one of these modern ponies, and they’ll start rolling their eyes. “Grandpa? Huge biceps, skinny legs. More muscles than brains. Why, he couldn’t even negotiate a tight corner without squealing at the top of his lungs. Smoked too much, too.”

Simply, every member of this trio leaves its circa-1970s counterpart in the virtual dust. As in, these babies are fast. Though saddled with the most mass and only mid-pack power, the Challenger R/T nonetheless rips to 60 mph in just 5.1 seconds and knocks-down the quarter in 13.6 seconds at 104.9 mph. The Hemi engine is a beauty, gushing with torque (410 lb-ft) and unfailingly smooth from idle to redline. The six-speed manual carves through its gates effortlessly, and, says MacKenzie, “The pistol-grip shifter works surprisingly well.” Loh concurs: “Nice seats and pistol-grip shifter, but a decidedly sedanlike seating position. High window sill, wide and low windshield, and dark interior give the Challenger a real musclecar feel.”

The Mustang GT carries the least-impressive on-paper physique — just 4.6L making 315 hp — but like a bantamweight it packs a helluva punch. Nearly 600 lb lighter than the Dodge, Ford’s pony rockets to 60 mph in a mere 4.9 sec and holds that edge through the quarter, nipping the lights in 13.5 sec at trap speed of 104.2 mph. Though the GT wears only a five-speed manual, the lack of a sixth cog doesn’t hinder its majestic stride. The engine is sizzling, too, happy to whirl away near its redline while making music worthy of a hit single. Can’t drive a Mustang GT to hear for yourself? Go play the chase scene from “Bullitt.” The 2010 GT performs with the same electrifying movie-star soundtrack.

Wielding 50 hp more than its next-closest rival and sporting a standard six-speed manual, the Camaro SS theoretically holds all the performance cards. And it isn’t bluffing. Despite the 3859 lb borne of the Camaro’s use of a preexisting structure (and the inherent compromises thereof), 0 to 60 mph takes a mere 4.7 sec; the quarter mile just 13 sec flat at 111.0 mph. When equipped with the manual, the SS also includes standard launch control; the driver simply mashes the throttle, waits for revs to stabilize around 4000 rpm, and then dumps the clutch. The on-board HAL 9000 does all the fancy footwork. The system works well enough, but it’s no match for an experienced human right foot. (Note the human-versus-computer-generated numbers in the specifications chart.) All our testers agreed that the Mustang GT sounds more intoxicating inside the cockpit (thanks to a carefully engineered sound pipe delivering just the best notes to the cabin), but from the outside it’s a different story. The Camaro SS won “Best Tenor” honors from all who heard it rumble past. And, of course, it’s got the chops to back up that “Don’t Tread on Me” audio. So be forewarned. Don’t tread on it.

The lightweight, Track Pack-enhanced Mustang GT posts the defining stats on the handling tests. Maximum grip is a neck-wrenching 0.95 g, and the GT circled our figure eight in just 25.5 sec (at a 0.70g average). The Camaro SS was nearly there, churning out a max lat of 0.90 g and running the ocho cones in 25.8 sec (at 0.80 average g). Far behind lagged the broad-shouldered Challenger R/T, good for just 0.82 g max and needing 27.5 sec (at 0.63 average g) to negotiate the figure eight.

Braking performance follows a similar pattern. Though wearing only conventional binders, the lower-mass Mustang GT hammers to a stop from 60 in just 108 ft. Blessed with those four big Brembos, the Camaro SS, though heavier, notches the win, stopping in just 105 ft. Then far behind arrives the Challenger R/T, needing a full 135 ft to reign in its forward motion. Uncle Isaac more or less predicted the outcome of this one.

How Do I Look?

“Pure sex,” is Loh’s description of the Camaro’s bod. “Deep draw of the flanks makes for some lovely, lurid, almost cartoony proportions. This is the Jessica Rabbit of musclecars.” Avers MacKenzie: “Exterior styling is dramatic, not retro. Front end a little too plasticky. Side profile is awesome — aggressive hips, slammed roofline, perfect ride height. Rear lights a little sad-eyed; reverse lights look like afterthoughts.” Inside, the Camaro blends 1969 cues with modern forms. “Steering-wheel rim profile odd,” says MacKenzie. “Interior is dark, A-pillars thick. But you sit in the car, not on it as in the Challenger. Interior styling is cool — order the four-pack of gauges on the console; it looks a bit Spartan without them.” All of us noted the laughable, submarine-hatch trunk opening, an obvious example of exterior style holding sway over all else. But to MacKenzie’s thinking, “If a trunk is important to you, buy a sedan.” Or, one might add, a Challenger.

On exterior design the Mustang drew mixed views. “Surfacing is very modern,” says Mackenzie. “Unlike Challenger, which has a pure retro stance, with wheels inside the body, the Mustang sheetmetal is teased out over the tires. But it looks like just another Mustang. No one will notice it. Ford has a real challenge figuring out what to do with the next one.” Loh was considerably more upbeat about the cockpit. “From the aluminum Mustang emblem on the steering wheel to the soft-touch dash to the bright and cleanly styled instruments — it’s the biggest leap from the old car and one of the major reasons I’d actually considering owning one. Only downside: not enough cubbies for the articles in my manpurse.” The Mustang also easily trumps the Camaro for rear-seat room and trunk space, though as Loh adds, “Who buys one of these for the back seat?”

Very troubling, though, is the Mustang’s shoddy build quality. The driver-side window gapped open above 60 mph or in any high-g corner, allowing a tornado of wind and noise to intrude. If this turns out to be a common Mustang flaw — we haven’t noticed it on previous drives — it’d be a complete deal-breaker (obviously, we plan to sample more GT test cars for evidence-gathering). We might also be more willing to overlook what might be a single-car defect if not for the Mustang’s ill-fitting trunklid. When closed, you could easily slide a half-dollar coin through the undulating gap on the deck, and probably a Royale with Cheese through the cavernous maw near the license plate. This is shameful execution, as if the Mustang GT had been engineered and built not by Ford but by Trabant. (In fairness, Ford spokespersons point out that our test car was a preproduction unit and maintain that all production 2010 Mustangs are fully up to quality standards.)

The Challenger may not top the performance charts, and its interior — though nicely finished — is the most familiar of the three (if you’ve seen a Chrysler 300, you’ve seen this cabin). But the Dodge is almost unbeatable for sheer Star Power. “Outside, the details are perfect,” says Loh. “Chrome Challenger script (that now matches the gas cap), R/T racing stripes, polished aluminum drag wheels. It really does look the business.” MacKenzie wholeheartedly agrees: “Retro-style stance, proportions, surfacing, detailing are superb. A loving homage to the past. Optional retro-style wheels and R/T stripes are perfect, and worth every last cent over the base R/T package. Roomiest car of the lot, with a useable back seat and big trunk.” Sure, the opening-night Camaro drew plenty of thumbs-up and frantic grabs for cell-phone cameras, but almost everybody loves the Challenger, too. At one of our photo stops, a group of young guys carefully perused each of our players. “Definitely this one,” said one grinning critic, pointing to the big orange Dodge. Of the trio, it’s the Challenger that most channels yesteryear; Dodge has perfectly balanced past and present.

Which is to say, on the subjective subject of styling, each of these ponies scores well. Pick your favorite flavor and enjoy.

Finish Lines

Going into this test, and knowing the basic stats, we had an inkling how it might turn out. (All three cars, by the way, eke out impressive and nearly identical fuel-economy results — though the Mustang’s lack of a six-speed means it finishes last on EPA.) Never did we guess, though, how close the overall finish would turn out to be.

In third place, the Dodge Challenger R/T. Third of three, but hardly last. As MacKenzie well sums up: “Hugely endearing personality. Even though the Challenger starts to fall apart dynamically above 7/10ths you can’t help but like the big guy. It’s sorta like a Heritage Soft-Tail Harley; a carefully crafted and easy to own reminder of a simpler, sunnier America.” Astutely executed, fast, and sit-back comfortable, the Challenger is the pony you’d ride for a 50-state tour. On the downside, the orange bruiser simply can’t carve with the precision of its rivals, and though it starts with a mid-pack base sticker ($30,945), adding the good stuff (six-speed manual, 3.92 rear axle, limited-slip diff, 20-in. wheels and tires, etc.) pushed the price of our tester to a trio-topping $38,270.

Finishing in second place . . . the Ford Mustang GT. Mind you, this was a photo-finish. The Mustang with Track Pack blew us all away with its sublime steering, incredible front-end grip, stylish cockpit, and beauteous V-8. As Loh notes, “That’s what most impressed me: Ford’s two competitors had the advantage of sampling 45 years of Mustang DNA, yet they still couldn’t pull out a runaway win.” The Mustang scores well on value, too: base price for the GT is $28,845, and with Premium package, Track Pack, security package, and the comfort group, our test car totaled $34,330. The Ford might even have scored an upset, except it cannot match the Camaro’s unfailing poise, its breathtaking power, or its styling drama. Those quality issues sure didn’t help, either.

And so . . . our winner, the Prime Pony of the 21st Century is . . . the 2010 Chevrolet Camaro SS. Considering all the ways GM could easily have got this car wrong, it’s nothing short of a triumph how unquestionably the company got it right. The Camaro might trail the Mustang in handling sharpness, and there’s no doubt it finishes last for cabin and trunk volume, but, well, you don’t pick your pony for the size of its saddlebags. Graced with massive power, excellent efficiency, unfailing refinement, and show-stopping looks, the Camaro SS nails every essential for its segment. What’s more, it’s priced to steal. Base sticker for the 1SS manual: just $30,995. With the Boston Acoustics audio package, our cloth-seat tester climbed only to $31,490. Go nuts with the options pencil — adding leather, power sunroof, ground effects, six-speed auto, and more stuff you really don’t need — and you can nudge the SS just over $40K.

So there you have it: Chevrolet claims the ponycar title, circa 2009. Now, go to it, Hatfields, McCoys, and HatCoys. We’ve been waiting 35 years to witness once again perhaps the all-time greatest feud in Autoland. Where’s my cigar? Ah, there’s the opening bell!

Horsepower

2010 Chevrolet Camaro News and Reviews

GM design chief Ed Welburn is retiring after 44 years with the automaker. Taking his place will be Michael Simcoe, current vice president of GM International Design. This passing of the torch marks the end of one era and the beginning of another. What could this mean for the future of GM design? To get an idea, let's look back…

When it comes to braking distances, you might think that the lighter the car, the better. However, when you have a lot of power under the hood, it's not that easy to come to a quick stop. We scoured through our database of every make and model to bring you the 20 vehicles we've tested with the shortest braking distances.…

As a kid, stubborn loose baby teeth can be an annoyance. Fortunately, classic tricks like tethering the tooth to a doorknob, and slamming the door can take care of that wiggling bicuspid in no time. However, when you're the son of a professional wrestler who goes by the ring name Rob Venomous, you leave the dental improvements to your pop's…

On this episode of Generation Gap, Davin Reckow and Matt Lewis compare a classic Pontiac Firebird to a custom built show car from John Lingenfelter that portrays what a modern Firebird could be today. Reckow chooses a 1968 Pontiac Firebird, while Lewis picks the 2010 Lingenfelter Trans Am - both cars are from the Lingenfelter collection.The 1968 Pontiac Firebird is…